Nintendo Switch - is it worth it?

[lindbergh]

Okay, so Nintendo has always been thinking out of the box. And instead of going head on with their rivals in terms of hardware power, they again went for innovation. Their newest console, the Nintendo Switch, is a hybrid between a home console and a handheld.

It is actually pretty unique. However, it's graphics are of course no match to that of the PS4 and the Xbox One. And since it is still quite new, there are only a few games available for the system.

This brings me to the question, is the Nintendo switch with it if you already have a decent home console and a powerful mobile device like the Samsung Galaxy S8 to play games with?

 

[Jog]

Although I don't own one I have seen it in person and used one.

From my quick interactions with it, you can see why Nintendo has been struggling past 5 years to be relevant anymore besides in fields of making games. It's hardware division has lagged behind and this was basically just a PlayStation Portable on shitty steroids. I would not recommend one personally as I would find it not being used much in my lifestyle as my phone, PC, or occasional usage of friends portable consoles is enough for me.

The ergonomics of the device however are nice and hold comfortably in the hands, and is "decently" priced economically. Like I said prior to this, little to offer, not much you'll get out of it in return.

 

[PenguinManiac]

The impact the Switch had on the market, in terms of both sales and marketing, has been much stronger than the Wii U's so far, and it's comparable to the Wii's. This alone is a guarantee that Nintendo will support it in the future, so expect a remarkable batch of first-party games by the end of its lifetime. This is extremely important to Nintendo consoles, because first-party games alone can justify its purchase (if they're to your liking, of course).
The concept itself is wonderful, and this is what the Wii U should have been in the first place. However, aside from the hybrid configuration the console has, its hardware specs are nothing to write home about, which was needed to keep the price reasonable: on the other hand, though, this means that, sooner or later, third parties will cut support for it. No matter how big the Switch's unit base will be, no developer will go through the trouble of downgrading hardware-intensive games meant to be played on future consoles (PS4 Pro, Xbox One X) for that long. Please keep in mind that, during its first year, the Wii U got ports of titles of the calibre of Mass Effect 3, Deus Ex: Human Revolution and Splinter Cell before being left to its doom.
What will keep the Switch alive in a year or two, at just half of its lifetime, will be indie games, first-parties and third-party exclusives (similar to what Bayonetta 2 was to the Wii U), which will only be pumped out if the Switch keeps selling as it is. I guess only Christmas will tell. If you want further proof about this uncertainty, which Nintendo itself shares, I'm sure, is the 3DS's support. They have claimed new games will still be produced throughout 2018, which is insane for a handheld console, considering they've also recently announced a new 2DS model. Why would you do that if you truly considered the Switch to be a worthy successor to both the Wii U and the 3DS (given its hybrid nature), with steady enough sales to support the company on its own?

I think it all boils down to your relationship with Nintendo first-party IPs: if you like them, you'll get hordes of them, and you can stay sure they will be high quality; if you don't, however, I'd be very wary, because third-party support could drop at any time in the next year(s, hopefully).

 

[JaiGuru]

I have had a Switch since day one. While I was skeptical of it, initially, its quirks have grown on me a lot over the months. I really enjoy a lot about the hardware. But to be honest, I have to say at this time it's probably not worth the investment. Launch years are notoriously devoid of software and most of what is on the Switch is natively developed for the Wii U and carried over. Even the excellent Breath of the Wild really is a Wii U game. Most of the online store options are lackluster Neo Geo games that didn't sell well when they were new so I'm not really sure what Nintendo's getting at using them as a selling point for their console decades later.

I am very confident the Switch will come out of this rut. All good consoles go through this in the beginning and, truthfully most others go through it worse. There's not nothing to play, it's just not a great selection of truly native games. By this time next year I think there will be more incentive to purchase and maybe even a larger capacity memory to come with it.

 

[SirJoe]

I haven't bought one yet, but I do like the idea. When they first announced it I thought it wouldn't take off but Nintendo does have a knack of coming out with new concepts and making them work. Sales are really doing well so it´s here to stay.

 

[arachnophobik]

Darn right it's worth it. Probably Nintendo's best work since a long time ago. I mean, we have Skyrim on Switch! Just imagine the potential it has. We might get games that we've never thought could be ported on a handheld (well technically, it's both a handheld and a console so...). I personally like Nintendo to tackle a more darker and serious subject matter in their future games, utilizing the power of Nintendo Switch.

 

[PenguinManiac]

I personally like Nintendo to tackle a more darker and serious subject matter in their future games, utilizing the power of Nintendo Switch.

That's what it looks like they're going to do with Metroid Prime 4. Metroid is a notoriously dark series, and probably one of the best ones at conveying a feeling of loneliness and dread. I don't think they should sell out just to appeal to the audience and uniform with the rest, but they do have the right IPs to try an approach. Just look at Fatal Frame/Project Zero and Eternal Darkness, both sitting there waiting to be exploited by the Switch.

 

[fireball916]

When I first heard about the Switch I was super excited, a console that is portable too!?!?! But now that some time has passes it doesn't seem that great anymore. I'd probably never take it outside my house so the portability kinda doesn't matter to me. For half the price at $150 you can get a New 2DS XL. So for less money I could get a device I'd be willing to play at home and take with me on the go. It seems to be under powered as a console and too expensive to be a handheld. Maybe my opinion would change if I used one or actually owned one. But for now I'd save my money and get the 2DS XL or wait for a sale on the New 3DS XL.

 

[aussie2]

It depends how much you want to play nintendo's games really. Right now I'd say it's probably not worth it because it looks like nintendo have opted for a soft launch (meaning there's few games our right now), and are releasing a few games a month in preparation for the end of the year when they'll have a decent line-up of games for the console and can expect stronger sales. If you're unsure I'd say wait for the holiday season because that's likely when you'll see some better deals appearing.

The console itself is exceptional from what I've heard, the hardware is mightily impressive, no-one can deny that. Mobile phones are powerful these days but there games don't stack up to a dedicated console, especially because the freemium model doesn't look like it's going to die out any time soon.

 

[Sunlyte]

I haven't gotten one yet, but me and my friends are dying for one. First off, I think the whole portable/console thing is awesome, and like another poster said, it's what the Wii U should've been. Secondly, all those sweet, sweet Nintendo games. BOTW, Super Mario Odyssey, Metroid, etc. On top of that, it seems like the best option out there for casual couch co-op, espcially with the option for 8 player local for games like Bomberman, an option that was lacking from the PS4 and Xbone and is not huge in PC gaming disappointingly. When I get my hands on one, I don't think I'll be disappointed.

 

[JaiGuru]

When I first heard about the Switch I was super excited, a console that is portable too!?!?! But now that some time has passes it doesn't seem that great anymore. I'd probably never take it outside my house so the portability kinda doesn't matter to me. For half the price at $150 you can get a New 2DS XL. So for less money I could get a device I'd be willing to play at home and take with me on the go. It seems to be under powered as a console and too expensive to be a handheld. Maybe my opinion would change if I used one or actually owned one. But for now I'd save my money and get the 2DS XL or wait for a sale on the New 3DS XL.

I do agree with this a little. I think the term "portable" is abused a bit as applied to the Switch. First off, it's $300. No one over the age of 12 is going to flippantly just run around with it. Second, it really does require a carrying case if you don't want it damaged. How "portable" is a console really if it requires that? It doesn't fit into your pocket either. I like my Switch a lot, but this particular selling point is on shaky ground with me. I don't think people should get on the hype train about that particular aspect.

 

[SeanP]

This type of question always depends on the person asking: what do you think about the games that are already out? Do the future releases of 2017 appeal to you? I own a Switch, but I honestly could have waited before committing the $300. I'm a Nintendo fanboy, and I love being an early adopter. Unfortunately, this led to me being burnt from the Wii U. I loved many of the games released for it, but in the end, I had to reexamine my tendency to blindly embrace everything done by Nintendo. The Switch has been handled entirely different than the Wii U, though. Nintendo's marketing has gone up about 100 notches, and the game's library is far more impressive than the Wii U's was at this time in its life cycle.

The Switch's early success is a good sign. Nintendo is too far behind on third-party titles, especially AAA ones. On the other hand, indie multi-plats, like Rocket League, could continue to carry Nintendo to fiscal success with their new console. I personally think Blizzard needs to get Overwatch on the Switch; I think a downgraded version could run and would be a huge hit!

 

[fireball916]

I do agree with this a little. I think the term "portable" is abused a bit as applied to the Switch. First off, it's $300. No one over the age of 12 is going to flippantly just run around with it. Second, it really does require a carrying case if you don't want it damaged. How "portable" is a console really if it requires that? It doesn't fit into your pocket either. I like my Switch a lot, but this particular selling point is on shaky ground with me. I don't think people should get on the hype train about that particular aspect.

Do you think they should've focused less on portability and more on making the console a bit more beefy on the specs side? That's something I'd worry about is future game support, is it going to be powerful enough for developers to want to develop on it for the next several years when PC/Consoles offer much more power/freedom? I haven't read anything on how strong it is compared to the PS4/Xbox but I've heard that Zelda has frame rate issues on occasion.

 

[giovanniiiii]

My only basis on whether to get this or not is that if Animal Crossing becomes available in this platform and/or Monster Hunter too. It would be fun to play if they allow local multiplayer on both those games. I'm hoping people will still buy Nintendo Switch and that its price decreases that it would be considerable to buy. For now, I think there aren't games that are worth playing yet for the Switch.

 

[JaiGuru]

Do you think they should've focused less on portability and more on making the console a bit more beefy on the specs side? That's something I'd worry about is future game support, is it going to be powerful enough for developers to want to develop on it for the next several years when PC/Consoles offer much more power/freedom? I haven't read anything on how strong it is compared to the PS4/Xbox but I've heard that Zelda has frame rate issues on occasion.

I know this will be controversial, but yes. I have a strong distaste for the "power brokers" in our ranks; the type of people who make purchase decisions based strictly on the on-paper specs of a console and think raw power is the only metric by which you weigh quality. That type of mentality is a huge problem. But so is the "power doesn't matter" crowd. We're at a sort of glass ceiling with games right now. We're not capable of delivering much more in terms of graphical quality. Beyond 4k there's no further resolution for our eyes to discern, and near-photo-realistic graphics are nothing new if that's your aim. But power isn't just about graphics. It's about providing the back end software designers need to bring us a new generation of enemy AI, to bring us more clever systems that make our game worlds come alive. Imagine worlds where every blade of grass sways, or an open world game where physics exist and are applied to almost every object! This is quickly becoming a reality, but only better machines will have the brute force to take advantage of it. I believe Nintendo has essentially priced themselves out of that future, near-term, by spending more production money on faux portability than raw power. I think this is a mistake that wont be apparent for a few more years, but which will strike like lightning in three years when the competition releases modern next-gen hardware and Nintendo is still lagging behind in the PS3.5 generation for a further three or four years.

I don't think it's all doom and gloom. I love Nintendo's first party IPs and am picking up Splatoon 2 this weekend, myself! But true innovation is not the product of gimmicks like portability, waggly motion controllers, or silly VR headsets. Those are all fun things, sure. But true innovation is a product of novel software design, and modern software design absolutely needs the kick in the pants stronger hardware has to offer.

 

[PenguinManiac]

I do agree with this a little. I think the term "portable" is abused a bit as applied to the Switch. First off, it's $300. No one over the age of 12 is going to flippantly just run around with it. Second, it really does require a carrying case if you don't want it damaged. How "portable" is a console really if it requires that? It doesn't fit into your pocket either. I like my Switch a lot, but this particular selling point is on shaky ground with me. I don't think people should get on the hype train about that particular aspect.

It's not a selling point to us aged and informed gamers, but it is to younger ones and families. I personally love it as a feature because I simply prefer to have the screen closer to me, but to them it must be not much more than a marketing gimmick. It's been mentioned a lot in their ads, but it hasn't been exploited in games, with 1, 2, Switch being the only exception (especially if you compare it to the usage Nintendo made of motion controls on the Wii, although that's a different case).
Still, this is what makes the Switch different from its competitors and also the only way to justify the lackluster hardware setup. They probably didn't even want to compete in the first place, but they needed something to make up for it - and guess what? It's working.

 

[PenguinManiac]

I believe Nintendo has essentially priced themselves out of that future, near-term, by spending more production money on faux portability than raw power. I think this is a mistake that wont be apparent for a few more years, but which will strike like lightning in three years when the competition releases modern next-gen hardware and Nintendo is still lagging behind in the PS3.5 generation for a further three or four years.

This. I'm not a fan of power creeping consoles either, but you don't need to go to such extent to keep your hardware up to date. As I've said, portability is just a marketing gimmick with which they tried to replicate the boom caused by motion controls of the Wii, and they partially succeded, but it won't last as long. The Wii was a one-time success, and the next time a console will reach a popularity of its promotion will feature affordable and easy-to-use VR (mark my words), but that won't happen in the near future (5+ years for sure). That's how it managed to survive against the PS3 and the Xbox 360, even if cut out from the third-party market.
Unless they release affordable upgrade modules to connect to the console while docked (or even directly built in the dock itself), I expect the Switch's future to be grim. And I'm a die-hard Nintendo fan.

 

[JaiGuru]

This. I'm not a fan of power creeping consoles either, but you don't need to go to such extent to keep your hardware up to date. As I've said, portability is just a marketing gimmick with which they tried to replicate the boom caused by motion controls of the Wii, and they partially succeded, but it won't last as long. The Wii was a one-time success, and the next time a console will reach a popularity of its promotion will feature affordable and easy-to-use VR (mark my words), but that won't happen in the near future (5+ years for sure). That's how it managed to survive against the PS3 and the Xbox 360, even if cut out from the third-party market.
Unless they release affordable upgrade modules to connect to the console while docked (or even directly built in the dock itself), I expect the Switch's future to be grim. And I'm a die-hard Nintendo fan.

Oh yeah. It's crystal clear that Nintendo is trying to bottle lightning twice and it's just not going to happen. The Wii existed in a time before mobile gaming had attracted all the casuals. These people are not gamers in the fullest sense of the word. They're not going to run out every five years to buy the newest hardware just to keep playing games they're not super invested in to begin with. You can't go back.

 

[PenguinManiac]

Oh yeah. It's crystal clear that Nintendo is trying to bottle lightning twice and it's just not going to happen. The Wii existed in a time before mobile gaming had attracted all the casuals. These people are not gamers in the fullest sense of the word. They're not going to run out every five years to buy the newest hardware just to keep playing games they're not super invested in to begin with. You can't go back.

Exactly. Casual gamers are too fleeting an audience to rely on them to support a console for its entire lifetime. And yet, Nintendo's focus on portability and on-the-go local multiplayer seems to suggest they're catering to them once again.
A large margin of Nintendo's profit has always come from games, though, and they're still going strong in that department (just look at Breath of the Wild, come on). However, they know it's not sufficient. They know it's a big risk they're taking. I wouldn't know how to explain why they're still supporting the 3DS otherwise (and even releasing a new model later this month). They needed a fallback.

 

[JaiGuru]

Exactly. Casual gamers are too fleeting an audience to rely on them to support a console for its entire lifetime. And yet, Nintendo's focus on portability and on-the-go local multiplayer seems to suggest they're catering to them once again.
A large margin of Nintendo's profit has always come from games, though, and they're still going strong in that department (just look at Breath of the Wild, come on). However, they know it's not sufficient. They know it's a big risk they're taking. I wouldn't know how to explain why they're still supporting the 3DS otherwise (and even releasing a new model later this month). They needed a fallback.

Their continued support of 3DS especially bums me out. I was hoping since Nintendo was banking on the Switch's portability that they'd retire their dedicated portable and all those wonderful franchises would be released on console, either as fuller experiences or as reduced price titles with lower quality graphics. I would have loved for Mario and Luigi games to be on the Switch.